[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lost argument and doc string

From: Tak Ota
Subject: Re: lost argument and doc string
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:01:30 -0800 (PST)

Wed, 13 Feb 2002 07:43:56 +0200 (IST): Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Tak Ota wrote:
> > I did the same experiment, running make-docfile manually on simple.el,
> > and got surprised.  And the source file is requesting the sequence
> > `dquote bslash newline' as the beginning of the valid doc string in
> > case of el files.  I don't think this is right.  Starting doc string
> > that way is only optional I believe.
> Please make sure that any changes you make in this don't break 
> loaddefs.el.  I believe loaddefs is the reason for that requirement of 
> how the doc string should begin (since loaddefs is generated by a 
> program, there's no problem satisfying that requirement in that case).  I 
> imagine that there was some reason to require such a format, in which 
> case we should avoid breaking that.

Sure, the change I submitted for make-docfile.c does not change any
doc strings, thus I believe does not affect loaddefs.el either.  It
only changes how to find the doc strings, including from loaddefs.el.

And yes, it must be made clear why those constraints I removed from
make-docfile.c were there before.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]